Jewish refugee Maria Altmann (Helen Mirren, left) and struggling attorney Randy Schoenberg (Ryan Reynolds, right) make for an unlikely duo in taking on the Austrian government over a controversial art restitution issue in director Simon Curtis’s engaging new drama, “Woman in Gold.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Company.

Taking a stand is something most of us will eventually find ourselves doing with regard to some aspect of our lives. It may not be especially easy, frequently taking us out of our comfort zones, nudging us to face our fears and ultimately prompting us to embrace our sense of self. The effort, however, could prove tremendously rewarding, making it possible to find our reason for living. That’s one of many remarkable personal revelations to emerge out of the experiences of the principals in the excellent new fact-based historical drama, “Woman in Gold.”

At the age of 81, many of us might be content to settle in and get comfortable for the remaining days of our lives. But not Maria Altmann (Helen Mirren). Despite her advancing age, she embarked on one of the most arduous, yet satisfying, undertakings of her life.

As a Jewish refugee who fled her native Vienna at the time of the Nazi annexation of Austria – the Anschluss – in 1938, a youthful Maria (Tatiana Maslany) made a harrowing escape to America with her husband, Fritz (Max Irons). In doing so, however, she left behind everything, including most of her family and virtually all of her belongings. And, not long after fleeing, the family’s possessions were looted by the invading Germans, who confiscated a wealth of jewelry, artwork and other items of value.

Chief among the stolen items was a portrait of Maria’s Aunt Adele (Antje Traue) by famed Austrian symbolist painter Gustav Klimt (Moritz Bleibtreu). Even though German Chancellor Adolf Hitler was not a fan of Klimt’s work, his Nazi minions nevertheless saw the value of the painting and readily added it to their stockpile of plundered artworks. Of course, given Adele’s Jewish heritage, the Nazis deemed a name change necessary for the painting, so what was originally titled Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I became Woman in Gold.

However, once World War II ended, the painting – like so many others that were stolen – was not returned to its rightful owners. Instead, it remained in the hands of Austrian authorities, becoming one of the prized items in the collection of Vienna’s famed Belvedere Gallery. The portrait eventually came to be known as “the Mona Lisa of Austria,” and, because of that, Austrian authorities were not about to part with it, even in the wake of a legally

In her younger days, Jewish refugee Maria Altmann (Tatiana Maslany, right) and her husband, Fritz (Max Irons, left), flee their native Vienna in the days leading up to World War II with the advance of Nazi occupying forces in the inspiring new historical drama, “Woman in Gold.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Company.

sanctioned art restitution program launched in the late 1990s to make amends for past misdeeds.

Despite the resistance of Austrian authorities, Maria refused to be deterred. After a brief conversation with longtime family friend Barbara Schoenberg (Frances Fisher), Maria contacted Barbara’s son Randy (Ryan Reynolds), a lawyer struggling to put his career back together after a failed attempt at launching his own practice, to see if he could help her. Although initially reluctant to become involved in Maria’s case, Randy had a change of heart when he learned that the painting had an estimated value in excess of $100 million. But, all financial considerations aside, there was another reason behind Randy’s decision to pursue the matter: As the grandson of Austrian composer Arnold Schoenberg, who also fled his homeland during the rise of the Third Reich, Randy had a personal stake in this crusade. Before long, the unlikely duo set off on a quest to retrieve the lost portrait – and to seek justice.

At the outset, the deck seemed heavily stacked against Maria and Randy. But, even with the odds against them, they soon found themselves in the company of helpful allies, most notably investigative journalist Hubertus Czernin (Daniel Brühl), whose intrepid reporting exposed the Nazi past of former Austrian President Kurt Waldheim and inspired passage of the country’s art restitution law. As a concerned citizen committed to seeing Austria’s history of fascist complicity exposed, Hubertus helped Maria and Randy cut through the bureaucratic red tape to formulate a strategy for taking on their opponents. Their solution was, to say the least, unique, one that would eventually land them before the U.S. Supreme Court and Chief Justice William Rehnquist (Jonathan Pryce). And their efforts ultimately set the worlds of art and international diplomacy on their ear.

So much for underestimating the underdog.

When it comes to incidents of the distant past, some of us may want to overlook them, dismissing them by simply saying “That was so long ago, just let it go.” However, when the events in question are painful or leave strong, lasting impressions, it may not be so easy to turn a blind eye. Given the circumstances under which Maria fled Vienna and what happened to her family subsequently, both at the hands of the Nazis during the war and Austrian authorities afterward, it’s understandable how she would want to seek justice. This is especially true when legal mechanisms, such as the art restitution program, and knowledgeable allies, such as Randy Schoenberg and Hubertus Czernin, become available. The desire to see matters set right is thus energized, a phenomenon that quickly takes on spirited momentum, even a life of its own.

Attorney Randy Schoenberg (Ryan Reynolds, right) faces some tough career choices in determining how to provide for his pregnant wife, Pam (Katie Holmes, left), and young family in “Woman in Gold.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Company.

Such suitable conditions typically emerge when we focus our attention on achieving desired ends through the conscious creation process, the philosophy that maintains we manifest our existence through the power of our thoughts, beliefs and intents. In this instance, Maria and her colleagues have done exactly that. They sought justice and then materialized the means to make it possible.

But, in this scenario, objectives other than exacting justice were involved, some of which had ramifications extending beyond the issue at hand. For Randy, for example, taking on Maria’s case was crucial to finding his purpose, a career that has since focused on the legal aspects of art-related matters, something that was not part of his career previously. However, at the time he agreed to pursue this matter, Randy did so somewhat hesitantly, partly because he knew little about the subject and partly because he was just starting a new job under a boss (Charles Dance) who wasn’t especially enthusiastic or encouraging about the idea. Through this experience, though, coupled with the impact of his own emotional connection to the circumstances, Randy found a new vocation, as well as a new calling in life, something that conscious creation practitioners call value fulfillment.

Maria and Hubertus discovered their own brands of value fulfillment, too. For both of them, seeking restitution was about more than just recovering a wrongfully obtained piece of artwork; it was also about drawing attention to a cause that had affected many families during and after the war and that had previously received comparatively little fanfare. Their efforts helped raise the profile of this issue, making it possible for others similarly situated to seek reparation.

In fleshing out their new callings, Maria, Randy and Hubertus all needed to develop certain aspects of their conscious creation skills. For starters, they discovered the importance of listening to (and acting upon) their intuition, one of the elements that contributes to the beliefs we form to create our respective realities. Intuition is something many of us readily dismiss, because it lacks “logic,” the quality we typically use to characterize the overarching nature of our existence. Faced with staggering odds stacked against them, this trio of champions might have easily abandoned their cause before they ever got started if they had followed a purely “rational” approach. But, instead, they chose to acknowledge their intuitional impulses in convincing themselves what was truly achievable, a skill that invariably helped make them more effective conscious creators.

One of the benefits that comes from being a more effective conscious creator is the ability to envision a wider range of probabilities for materialization. Thinking more broadly allows ideas to emerge that might not have been

Attorney Randy Schoenberg (Ryan Reynolds, left) and refugee-turned-activist Maria Altmann (Helen Mirren, center), aided by investigative journalist Hubertus Czernin (Daniel Brühl, right), take on the Austrian government to seek restitution for an improperly acquired work of art in the inspiring new docudrama, “Woman in Gold.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Company.

considered previously, and that was the case in the team’s legal strategy. By employing a never-before-tried approach, they explored new territory in the world of jurisprudence, testing the waters of possibility to see if it could yield the desired result. If successful, not only would it benefit their cause, but it would also set a precedent that others could draw upon in future litigation, a creation that had wider implications – and the potential to help others facing similar circumstances at a later time.

Facing fears was another skill that the protagonists honed through this creative experience. Randy, for example, needed to face the fear of taking on a risky cause at a time when his career was in a precarious position, not an easy decision for a young father whose wife (Katie Holmes) was expecting their second child. Meanwhile, Maria had to address her fear of returning to Vienna, something she vowed she would never do after her perilous flight to freedom. And, as for Hubertus, he needed to become involved to exorcise the demons of his family’s past, setting matters to right for the honor of his future relations and his country. These issues were challenging for each of them, but they rose to the occasion, thanks to the development and deployment of beliefs that would allow them to do so.

Through their efforts, Randy, Maria and Hubertus succeeded in exposing the truth, an undertaking they pursued with integrity, a crucial consideration for bringing desired results into being. This is essential for achieving satisfaction and fulfillment in our conscious creation initiatives, and it’s obvious that these crusaders were wholly earnest in their approach. They clearly set an example for all of us to follow.

“Woman in Gold” tells its story capably, deftly mixing present-day and flashback sequences, with another great performance by Mirren and a surprisingly good (though sometimes uneven) portrayal by Reynolds. The film’s production values (especially in the historical sequences) are top-notch, and its cinematography and soundtrack lend themselves well to the finished product. The picture also does a great job of outlining and explaining some rather complicated legal concepts, not an easy feat to pull off.

However, despite these many strengths, the movie has come under a fair share of criticism. Some have contended that its approach is overly sentimental, perhaps even Pollyanna. Others have said that its underdog-against-the-odds narrative featuring an unlikely dynamic duo is rather formulaic and unoriginal, mimicking the story lines found in such films as “Philomena” (2013) and “Erin Brockovich” (2000). And others still have claimed (and, admittedly, not entirely without merit) that the script is too heavy-handed and self-righteous at times. However, this is a story that needs to be told, and, given its subject matter, there’s not a lot of room for subtlety, something for which the filmmakers should have no need to apologize. The picture sheds light on this topic more effectively than others that have attempted to do so, such as the highly touted but ultimately disappointing comedy-drama, “The Monuments Men” (2014).

Finding our way in the world may take us down some unfamiliar (and seemingly unlikely) paths. Yet, if we follow the impulses leading us in those directions, we might find ourselves reaching degrees of fulfillment never before considered. In even greater terms, however, we also could discover that our creations serve a greater purpose, one that benefits both us and those around us in the true spirit of value fulfillment. And that would be work of art if there ever were one.

Jonas (Brenton Thwaites, right), the newly appointed Receiver of Memories for a future society known as the Community, learns the ropes from an aging mentor simply known as the Giver (Jeff Bridges, left) in the new sci-fi adventure, “The Giver.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Co.

Like an enormous dam holding back a huge reservoir, efforts aimed at intentionally quashing the essence of human nature pose quite a challenge for those seeking to implement them. And, should the occasion arise when those metaphorical floodgates need to be opened, those in charge of monitoring those relief mechanisms had better be prepared for what flows through them. The consequences of mishandling such an important task could be devastating for those seeking to maintain control. But, then, perhaps control isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, a notion capably explored in the new sci-fi adventure, “The Giver,” based on the best-selling young adult novel by author Lois Lowry.

Life in “the Community,” a pristine, well-mannered society of the future, seems like a utopian enclave. But, as quickly becomes apparent, looks can be deceiving. While political, social and economic problems like war, famine and poverty have been eradicated – systematically dispensed with in the wake of “the Ruin” – those benefits come with a cost:

Everyone’s behavior is rigidly controlled, and their actions are tightly monitored, with Community residents receiving daily drug injections to ensure tranquility and cooperation – not to mention quietly coerced compliance.

Nearly all decisions – both big and small – are handled by a Council of Elders, with major pronouncements delivered with ostensibly convincing sincerity by the Community’s Chief Elder (Meryl Streep).

Even though family units resemble the traditional model, their makeup is determined by considerations other than biology – or even basic emotional bonds.

Each resident’s calling in life is predetermined, with lifetime vocational assignments doled out upon turning age 18. Community members retain these assignments until retirement, when they are quietly relocated to a new life in “Elsewhere.”

Seems like paradise, right? Community members apparently believe so. But that’s all about to change with the coming of age of a

The quietly coercive Chief Elder (Meryl Streep, foreground, left) of a future society known as the Community tries to thwart plans for reform initiated by the aging Receiver of Memories, a.k.a. the Giver (Jeff Bridges, foreground, right) in director Phillip Noyce’s “The Giver.” Photo by David Bloomer, courtesy of The Weinstein Co.

gifted young man named Jonas (Brenton Thwaites).

During a ceremony in which lifetime work assignments are handed out, Jonas learns that he has been given a special designation, “the Receiver of Memories.” Unlike his peers, who are assigned comparatively mundane tasks like groundskeeper and child nurturer, Jonas is given this charge because of his unique capabilities, most notably his gift of second sight, an ability to see beyond the ordinary and accepted aspects of daily life. He’s chosen for this task because only one who possesses such qualities is deemed worthy of such a challenging – and potentially dangerous – assignment.

When Jonas begins his training, he’s assigned to work with the current holder of memories. And, since Jonas is to become the Receiver of such information, the one charged with imparting it to him is known simply as “the Giver” (Jeff Bridges), an aging mentor who is all too familiar with the arduous responsibility Jonas is about to assume.

In the course of his training, Jonas learns many things previously unknown to him (or to any of his peers for that matter). As the Receiver of Memories, he’s exposed to knowledge of all the aforementioned ills that have been purged from Community life and consciousness. But, at the same time, he also discovers the many joys that have been expunged from the residents’ awareness. Beneficial and uplifting concepts that we take for granted, like love and happiness, are totally foreign to Jonas and his peers. What’s more, Jonas is strictly forbidden from sharing these ideas with them; his knowledge is only to be used for “consultations” with the Elders when they need memory-related advice for solving problems. But, thanks to the aid of the Giver, Jonas and his fellow residents are about to embark on an odyssey filled with remarkable revelations.

As parents of a gifted young man, a concerned Mother (Katie Holmes, left) and Father (Alexander Skarsgård, right) grow worried when their son embarks on what appear to be socially unacceptable plans in the young adult sci-fi adventure, “The Giver.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Co.

Of course, there are tremendous risks in what Jonas is about to undertake. The Giver is well aware of this, too, especially in light of his unfortunate experience with a previous Receiver (Taylor Swift), who struggled with the power of such knowledge and its attendant ramifications. On top of this, those interested in protecting the status quo frown upon the dissemination of such radical ideas, and they’re willing to take whatever steps are necessary to preserve their way of life. They even try turning Jonas’s friends (Odeya Rush, Cameron Monaghan) and family (Alexander Skarsgård, Katie Holmes, Emily Tremblay) against him to get him to abandon his plans. But, considering the risks – and rewards – involved, Jonas forges ahead, despite a highly uncertain future.

Those well-versed in conscious creation, the means by which we create the reality we experience, understand that our beliefs determine what unfolds before us. The nature of those beliefs, in turn, depends on the input afforded them by our intellect and intuition. Both are essential to make the process work effectively. And that’s where the Community’s founders got themselves, the residents and their progeny into trouble.

Given the virtual absence of emotion and feeling – hallmarks of the intuitive side of the belief equation – in the Community, it’s obvious that those who established the foundations of this new society did so on the basis of logic and reason, key indicia of the intellect. Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with the intellect, but relying upon it exclusively to determine the nature of one’s beliefs (and everything that stems from them) is a recipe for disaster (especially when employed on a scale as wide as that of an entire population). It stifles creativity and even hampers the functioning of everyday skills, like basic problem-solving (as is apparent from the Elders’ need to have someone with the Receiver’s knowledge on hand to begin with). And, should glimmers of awareness of these “volatile” concepts begin to emerge, those who try to squelch them have no idea what they’re up against.

So why are the Elders so preoccupied with stifling such “radical” notions? They sincerely believe that the fallout from the Ruin was so intolerable that they must take all necessary steps to prevent its recurrence. The cure for that, in their estimation, is to rein in the causes that prompted it, most notably the power of choice. The Elders have successfully convinced themselves that this fundamental human birthright is the root of all of the ills that gave rise to the Ruin and that it must be contained at all costs. Choice, they surmise, leads to differences, which lead to comparison, which then lead to jealousy, envy and greed, qualities that ultimately brought down the world of before. So, by eliminating the source of the problem, they maintain, the problem is itself eradicated. Or so they think. Indeed, as the Chief Elder ardently observes (and sincerely believes), “When people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong.”

In light of human history, some would contend that a good argument could be made for the Chief Elder’s outlook. However, eliminating choice carries other consequences. It stifles such natural human tendencies as the need and desire to create, to evolve, to overcome limitations and to pursue our intrinsic constant state of becoming. By removing such abilities from our manifestation toolbox, we leave ourselves open to being unprepared for the challenges we face, some of which could have implications tied to the nature of our humanity – and possibly even our very survival.

It’s futile to think these innate stirrings can be suppressed indefinitely. As has been demonstrated previously through the

Haunted by the painful memories of a previous protégé (Taylor Swift, right) unprepared for her responsibilities, the aging Receiver of Memories (Jeff Bridges, left) recalls a happier time in their ill-fated relationship in the movie adaptation of author Lois Lowry’s “The Giver.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Co.

experiences of the inhabitants of other would-be utopias, such as those portrayed in films like “Brave New World” (1998), “Logan’s Run” (1976), “THX 1138” (1971) and even “TRON: Legacy” (2010), the denial of our inherent nature as beings whose fundamental purpose is to live to create is destined to fail. That can be a difficult lesson for those who would attempt to thwart us in the pursuit of our basic human mission, but it’s one that must come to pass for those who try to block its fulfillment.

The young adult dystopian future movie genre has been somewhat overworked in recent years with the release of such pictures as “The Hunger Games” films (2012, 2013) and “Divergent” (2014), among others, but “The Giver” nevertheless does a respectable job of delivering the goods. Its inventive cinematography, offering a carefully crafted mix of black-and-white and color photography reminiscent of the techniques used in “Pleasantville” (1998), lends a poetic touch to the narrative (especially in its duotone depiction of the Community, a world where virtually everything is metaphorically seen in black and white). Capable acting and an emotive background score complement the imagery well.

With the intention of creating a better life for his friend Fiona (Odeya Rush, right), Jonas, the newly appointed Receiver of Memories (Brenton Thwaites, left), prepares to embark on a perilous personal journey in “The Giver.” Photo courtesy of The Weinstein Co.

With that said, however, the film’s writing leaves much to be desired at times. Some sequences go on too long, others are underexplained and some are wholly improbable, even with a healthy stretch of the imagination. A half-hearted attempt at incorporating a love story between Jonas and his friend Fiona (Rush) comes up short, too. But, even with these failings, the picture still provides ample fodder for contemplation and discussion, especially for those who are new to the metaphysical concepts explored here, the young adult audience at which this film (and its source material) are targeted.

In an age when so many of us have been so willing to surrender so much for the sake of comfort and security, “The Giver” should serve as a cautionary tale about what we stand to lose if we give away too much. It’s likely that those losses ultimately won’t endure, given the power of human nature, but recapturing what we willingly forfeit may be a major hurdle to surmount. So, in light of that, we should keep a finger on the button to those aforementioned floodgates – just in case we need it.

Be The First to Know

Email address:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

My VividLife, Episode 1: Equine Therapy with Jennifer Schramm

Shayne Traviss

Sometime's growth involves digging up the dirt and planting anew...
After over 20 years of marketing, promoting and producing others I've decided to open a new chapter in my life.
If you long to go higher, live a life 'all in' join me as I dive in deep sharing my life experiences, travels and inspirations for living a VividLife.

Follow Me On Instagram

About VividLife.me

Founded by Shayne Traviss formerly VividLife.me was an online resource for personal growth through over 10,000 blogs, audio conversations and videos, from thought leaders, best-selling authors and wellness experts from around the globe. VividLife.me provided engaging conversations on consciousness and human potential with Arianna Huffington, Jane Fonda and Alanis Morrissette, wisdom packed blogs from spiritual Icons Iyanla Vanzant and Ram Dass, Green Tips from David Suzuki’s Queen of Green, Advice from Award Winning Parenting and Relationships Experts, Recipes from Vegetarian, Vegan, Raw Chef’s and more… and reached and inspired over 3 million people around the globe.
However sometime's growth involves digging up the dirt and planting anew...
And after over 20 years of marketing, promoting and producing others Shayne Traviss decided to open a new chapter in his life.
If you long to go higher, live a life 'all in' join him as he dives in deep sharing his life experiences, travels and inspirations for living a VividLife.